I'm pretty sure Apple couldn't care less about the iPad being categorized as a "PC" or not. Apple is really the only company in the "PC" industry laughing its way to the bank. The truth is that the iPad is taking a big bite out of traditional PC sales, including the now virtually extinct netbooks. Let these research firms and PC makers waste their time compiling these numbers and trying to make some sense out of 'em. It's now all about the ecosystem and the bottom line that it produces.

I'm pretty sure Apple couldn't care less about the iPad being categorized as a "PC" or not. Apple is really the only company in the "PC" industry laughing its way to the bank. The truth is that the iPad is taking a big bite out of traditional PC sales, including the now virtually extinct netbooks. Let these research firms and PC makers waste their time compiling these numbers and trying to make some sense out of 'em. It's now all about the ecosystem and the bottom line that it produces.

+1 on that's Apple is not the one making outlandish assumptions, manipulating statistics, predicting the future or consulting tarot cards to write an article to make "news". Apple cashes checks.

Phones have their own sales category, so no one is trying to decide whether to lump them into PC sales. So the point is moot.

Tablets, however, fall into the same basic "Personal Computing" use case, even if a tablet isn't the best computer for every function. Personal Computing is it's primary function, not a secondary one.

Desktops, Laptops, and Tablets are all PCs, with different form factors and different strengths. But PCs nonetheless.

That is the point. Since a smartphone can do more than a tablet why is it in its own category? 10 years ago making phone calls on a phone was its primary function but not today. I have 700 minutes on my family plan of 5 smartphones, I never get near it. The point is far from moot. My whole point is that this article is garbage. Some wanna-be analyst decided to lump tablets into PCs (only for Apple) in order to deem Apple the 2012 top PC manufacturer. Regardless that it makes no sense, regardless that 2012 is only in the 1st quarter, regardless that smartphones can do everything a tablet can. Only thing that mattered was that after much manipulating, Apple is now the number one PC manufacturer because he says so and now it is news and AppleInsider regurgitated this garbage. And many have drank the kool-aid regardless of how rediculous it is.

The point of the article and the point you seem to miss. Is that people are using the functionality of the iPad to replace the same functionality that would otherwise use a PC. This trend is destined to grow.

Few to no one is using a phone to fully replace the same functionality that otherwise they would have used a computer.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hellacool

My whole point is that this article is garbage. Some wanna-be analyst decided to lump tablets into PCs (only for Apple) in order to deem Apple the 2012 top PC manufacturer. Regardless that it makes no sense, regardless that 2012 is only in the 1st quarter, regardless that smartphones can do everything a tablet can. Only thing that mattered was that after much manipulating, Apple is now the number one PC manufacturer because he says so and now it is news and AppleInsider regurgitated this garbage. And many have drank the kool-aid regardless of how rediculous it is.

I generally don't like reading forums like this as it usually denigrates to snide bickering. But here's my comment. Is the iPad a personal computer? Some say yes, some say no. Some say we must classify the following differently: "tablets", "smartphones", "laptops", "netbooks", "ultrabooks", "all-in-ones", "desktops", "rack servers", "supercomputers", etc. Let history decide what a "PC" is. Some day we will have computers on our watch, will that be a another non-PC device? Then we'll have computers on our eyeglasses, is that yet another category? If there is no generic word to cover all these categories, we have a problem. Obviously the generic word will forever be "computer". But it is entirely possible that "Personal Computer" may be defined by history as "something that sits on a desk". Perhaps these new "post-PC devices" will be known to historians as "Mobile Computers", which is "something that you carry". Perhaps "Wearable Computers" will be a category some day. Perhaps "Nano Computers." The future will come to pass, and only then will we know which terms win. PC? MC? WC? NC?

That is the point. Since a smartphone can do more than a tablet why is it in its own category? 10 years ago making phone calls on a phone was its primary function but not today. I have 700 minutes on my family plan of 5 smartphones, I never get near it. The point is far from moot. My whole point is that this article is garbage. Some wanna-be analyst decided to lump tablets into PCs (only for Apple) in order to deem Apple the 2012 top PC manufacturer. Regardless that it makes no sense, regardless that 2012 is only in the 1st quarter, regardless that smartphones can do everything a tablet can. Only thing that mattered was that after much manipulating, Apple is now the number one PC manufacturer because he says so and now it is news and AppleInsider regurgitated this garbage. And many have drank the kool-aid regardless of how rediculous it is.

The only reason these defined categories have any importance are so that businesses and investors can assess marketshare between competing companies.

Trying to merge phones (even smartphones) and PCs doesn't help anyone assess what's happening in the computer market. But if tablets are eating PC marketshare (laptops or desktops), then then I think its tremendously important for that to be represented, and of course tablets from all makers should be included in those calculations.

If the industry wants to subset the PC space into desktops, laptops, and tablets to get a clearer picture of what's happening in a particular segment, or see what the split is between those segments, then great. But I think the overall "PC" market needs to consider the tablet the 3rd leg in the "PC stool" now.

Yes a car can replace a motorcycle and a motorcycle can replace a car. Maybe not in your situation but in some situations. Same as a tablet and PC. I can not play BF3 on my iPad nor can I take my desktop on a plane. For the most part they are two distinct categories and in some situations one can replace the other but not all. Not the majority. Many own both because they have too or choose too.

My point is that they are still PC's in general. Just because you can't play BF3 on an iPad doesn't disqualify an iPad as a computer.

For many people, their computer use goes as far as using it for email and web surfing. If they were using a notebook in the past, then an iPad is a perfect replacement.

Many people have only a car or only a motorcycle, but I still have to pay the DMV to have my two distinctly different methods of transportation registered as "Motor Vehicles".

Smartphones get murky due to the phone capability, but even I still consider them to be microPC's simply because they can do essentially the same basic functions as a full-size PC with the exception of being limited to a small screen size. I actually use my iPhone more than my iPad.

I agree, a personal computer is a personal computer but to just use the iPad to artificially inflate Apples numbers is ignorant. The iPhone/smart phone can do everything a tablet can yet phones are not included. Are all the other manufactures tablets also included?

You seem to be stubbornly refusing to see the significance of screen size. I have an iPod touch and iPad. The ultra portability of the iPod touch is useful but there is no question that there are many activities are much more feasible on an iPad rather than the iPod. Claiming there is no difference is simply disingenuous.

You seem to be stubbornly refusing to see the significance of screen size. I have an iPod touch and iPad. The ultra portability of the iPod touch is useful but there is no question that there are many activities are much more feasible on an iPad rather than the iPod. Claiming there is no difference is simply disingenuous.

So screen size is the difference? I have a 27" on my PC so therefore a PC must have a big screen size? Makes surfing , gaming and photo editing much more feasible than on an iPad. What works for you doesn't mean it works for everyone. Maybe I like a small screen and ultra portability. We can go round and round all day. Bottom line a tablet is very distinct as is a PC. As time goes by the lines will blur but right now they are distinct, a large majority of people have both a tablet and PC because a tablet just is not a PC in traditional sense and people still need both.

If nothing else is accomplished, please learn basic spelling. The word is "RIDICULOUS". There is no 'E' in the spelling of ridiculous. That is all.

My bad. I do not type as well on my iPad as I do on my PC. Having that mouse and full keyboard is nice. But I appreciate the contribution you made to this thread, without your wisdom and insight it surely would have gone off topic, good job.

LOL. They created a category with tablets so let to be. I don't see the point of merging it. And Mac's are doing fine.

Exactly. It is apparent that the author of this article feels that Apple should be considered the number one PC manufacture in the world and if they can not attain that status based on the current definition, well let's just change the definition to suit his desire. It is actually sad.

Edit:

Just followed the link to the original article, the author is a tool bag. He admits he did not include tablets for any other manufacturer. How does that even make sense? "Tablets are PCs as long as they have an Apple on them". Clown.

Hey AppleInsider, do you actually read these articles before you post them? Maybe see if the author actually has any credentials? Maybe the article makes sense? AppleOutsider, really, so unoriginal I don't know, check sources?

The iPad would have alerted you to the misspelling and even attempted to correct the misspelled word for you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hellacool

My bad. I do not type as well on my iPad as I do on my PC. Having that mouse and full keyboard is nice. But I appreciate the contribution you made to this thread, without your wisdom and insight it surely would have gone off topic, good job.

Tablets are not PCs. At least not yet. In the future the lines between PC and tablet will blur but right now they are not. My phone does everything my iPad does, is it a PC? Anything to boost numbers. Are all the other manufactures having their tablets counted? They are pretty crappy but I would venture they sold enough to offset Mac sales. Heck, motorcycles cut into automobile sales but that doesnt make a motorcycle a car.

I can run anything on my iPad that runs of my Mac now including full blown MS office. Check out Splashtop Remote Desktop. So, as well as being a phenomenal stand alone it is a totally awesome terminal. Try that on your phone

From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've owned them all.Long on AAPL so biased"Google doesn't sell you anything, Google just sells you!"

Exactly. It is apparent that the author of this article feels that Apple should be considered the number one PC manufacture in the world and if they can not attain that status based on the current definition, well let's just change the definition to suit his desire. It is actually sad.

Just followed the link to the original article, the author is a tool bag. He admits he did not include tablets for any other manufacturer. How does that even make sense? "Tablets are PCs as long as they have an Apple on them". Clown.

The 'clown' clearly states why he constructed the chart the way he did. He used exactly the same data that the original Deutsche Bank analyst used.... But he did it properly!

If you're so concerned about the 'missing' tablet numbers then why don't you factor them in and lets see your chart?

If we where to count the iPad as a PC then it completely blurs the lines. Would we not also include Microsofts Xbox 360 or Sony's PS3 then. As the PS3 does have internet access can use a full keyboard, and can go to google docs and do productivity work it has software built for it all of the components of a computer. Also the iPod touch is also a computer if we lump the the iPad in it. Lets let the PCs be defined by the OS not the function because that blurs the lines. Window's PCs have a huge difference then the iPad. They ran a full blown OS. iOS is a great MOBILE operating system don't get me wrong. But iOS is just what it is and it is great at that it is a mobile OS it is not meant to replace OS X or Windows or even Linux(laughed at that one my self). It is meant to compliment the full OSs.

End of the day the iPad in reality is a large iPhone. You MBA is still able to run more versatile software, more media software(Formats), better productivity software, more powerful to do real photo shop and related software.

Tablets are not PCs. At least not yet. In the future the lines between PC and tablet will blur but right now they are not. My phone does everything my iPad does, is it a PC? Anything to boost numbers. Are all the other manufactures having their tablets counted? They are pretty crappy but I would venture they sold enough to offset Mac sales. Heck, motorcycles cut into automobile sales but that doesnt make a motorcycle a car.

Yeah, I was actually thinking - based on that, does massive bicycle production make Great Wall of China biggest car manufacturer in the world?

My point is that they are still PC's in general. Just because you can't play BF3 on an iPad doesn't disqualify an iPad as a computer.

For many people, their computer use goes as far as using it for email and web surfing. If they were using a notebook in the past, then an iPad is a perfect replacement.

Many people have only a car or only a motorcycle, but I still have to pay the DMV to have my two distinctly different methods of transportation registered as "Motor Vehicles".

Smartphones get murky due to the phone capability, but even I still consider them to be microPC's simply because they can do essentially the same basic functions as a full-size PC with the exception of being limited to a small screen size. I actually use my iPhone more than my iPad.

No, they are not. They are tablets. Yes they can do some of PCs' work, or even all for some people. But they are still different category.

Motorcycles can do some of the things cars do, and for some people they can do everything required. But they are still not cars. Yes they might sell more units than cars, and people might select to buy a motorcycle instead of car... but that still doesn't make them cars.

So Kawasaki, even if they sell more bikes than (say) Ford sells cars, is still not the biggest car brand in the world.

Tablets are not PCs. At least not yet. In the future the lines between PC and tablet will blur but right now they are not. My phone does everything my iPad does, is it a PC? Anything to boost numbers. Are all the other manufactures having their tablets counted? They are pretty crappy but I would venture they sold enough to offset Mac sales. Heck, motorcycles cut into automobile sales but that doesnt make a motorcycle a car.

Blah blah blah. Nothing personal, but the longer I live, the less patience I have with this kind of hair-splitting overly analytical view of things. Bottom line: people who own tablets (including me--I'm posting this from my iPad right now) use them in place of time spent on laptops or PCs. End of story. I don't give a rip how you classify it all but don't fool yourself. The tablet has muscled its way into the computing market. You may not call it a PC but it's serving the same purpose.

I heard these similar arguments made about GUI- and mouse-based computers in the mid-80s. "They're good for a few things but they're not real computers." "They're cute little toys but you can't do any real work on them." Blah blah blah.

Good post. Yeah- to argue about it is pretty nerdy- because at the end of the day, who cares? But there is no doubt iPads consume the laptop market. My parents don't have two laptops like they used to- they now have a laptop and an iPad.

If we where to count the iPad as a PC then it completely blurs the lines. Would we not also include Microsofts Xbox 360 or Sony's PS3 then. As the PS3 does have internet access can use a full keyboard, and can go to google docs and do productivity work it has software built for it all of the components of a computer. Also the iPod touch is also a computer if we lump the the iPad in it. Lets let the PCs be defined by the OS not the function because that blurs the lines. Window's PCs have a huge difference then the iPad. They ran a full blown OS. iOS is a great MOBILE operating system don't get me wrong. But iOS is just what it is and it is great at that it is a mobile OS it is not meant to replace OS X or Windows or even Linux(laughed at that one my self). It is meant to compliment the full OSs.

End of the day the iPad in reality is a large iPhone. You MBA is still able to run more versatile software, more media software(Formats), better productivity software, more powerful to do real photo shop and related software.

That's how I feel...and people act as if we are saying the iPad is not a "PC" to somehow diminish it's value...but that's not why I'm doing it...in fact no one considered it a "PC" until some analyst did and they saw that including it in that category made Apple the largest PC manufacturer.

I always saw tablets, PCs, and recently smartphones as subcategories of the Computer.

Also the arguments that make the iPad a PC yet every smartphone not a PC make no sense as for the most part you can do everything and more on a smartphone that you can on an iPad...in fact over 50% of my posts are from my smartphone.

Servers can be considered PCs, and in fact can be used to do everything that can be done on a PC. But they are not typically counted in PC totals. So, there's nothing wrong with counting iPads in a separate category. There's also nothing wrong with including iPads as PCs. This argument is a total waste of time, space and energy.

If this is true, then the article is inaccurate, as it only mentioned the iPad. For the sake of conistency, one should include both iPhone and iTouch numbers in the assessment, as they all run the same OS, and thus are able to run the same applications.

Thus, one does not need to wait for Apple's quarterly report to state that they are the number one computer maker based on the combined sales of Macs, iPads, iPhones, and iTouch.

You seem to be stubbornly refusing to see the significance of screen size. I have an iPod touch and iPad. The ultra portability of the iPod touch is useful but there is no question that there are many activities are much more feasible on an iPad rather than the iPod. Claiming there is no difference is simply disingenuous.

but they all run the same OS. Screen size is irrelevant, and based on an arbitrary judgment on your part. Your feasiblity argument is also arbitrary. Many activities are more feasible on a Desktop than on an iPad, regardless of screen size. Many activites are more relevant on a Desktop than on an iPad, precisely because of screen size. So, what is your point.

Your motorcycle analogy is total spin. I ride a motorcycle every day. A motorcycle (iPad) AND an automobile (desktop/laptop) are BOTH "motor vehicles" (PC's). Each one on their own can do some things better than the other, but neither can replace the other.

However, outside a few and becoming increasingly obsolete examples, modern tablets can do most things and should be considered a PC category.

As to netbooks, a lot of people dismiss them without knowing the reasons for their decline. As low-power, low footprint, long battery life and low cost laptop replacements, netbooks were a really great device category when they were first introduced. The problem is that Intel put artificial constraints on the amount of RAM and screen resolution that netbooks could have, to avoid canibalizing the notebook segment. As a result, netbooks were generally limited to 1 MB RAM and 600p screens, specs that quickly grew old and irrelevant. The rest is history. Informed people would agree though that without the purely artificial restrictions on hardware, netbooks would have gradually evolved to fill in the space that now Intel wants to reserve for smartbooks.

These sales figures go back 10 years, so the most blatant answer to the question of what is a PC is: Can it run Doom? Actually a secondary question needs to be is it for personal use, seeing as by definition PC stands for Personal Computer.

Tablets are not PCs. At least not yet. In the future the lines between PC and tablet will blur but right now they are not. My phone does everything my iPad does, is it a PC? Anything to boost numbers. Are all the other manufactures having their tablets counted? They are pretty crappy but I would venture they sold enough to offset Mac sales. Heck, motorcycles cut into automobile sales but that doesnt make a motorcycle a car.

I just read where 12% of enterprise workers have moved from Laptops to iPads. They must think of iPads as PC's or PC replacements.

Behind Hellacool's logic is not some standardized definition - but a personal use case. Which of course varies from individual to individual - and therefore is not a good standard to apply. For example - the keyboard differentiator, cited by Hellacool. I can use my bluetooth keyboard to type on my iPhone and iPad. In fact my iMac sleeps blissfully unaware that those devices have pirated the precious, self-defining keyboard for their own miniscule and nefarious purposes, further eroding the iMac's PC sense of self.

If you depend on the reduced functionality/size issue you run into problems with the underpowered netbooks and the fully clouded Chromebooks.

Earlier tablets were built on modified laptop technologies - which is why they were large, expensive, clunky and inconvenient - and why they never captured the publics' interest. So you may argue that running an spartan mobile OS (be it iOS, Android, QNX, or others) means that it falls out of the category of PC based on the OS. But Oses like iOS and QNX are built around robust cores that are not sharply differentiated from the more classical desktop/laptop OS cores. And what do you do when you have something like Microsoft claims Windows 8 to be - an OS for whatever platform you choose to put it on? So your OS argument goes out the window there too.

Consider this: if the vast majority of the consumer market does a small subset of a range of optional activities that can be accomplished on a "PC", and suddenly is able to do all of that and more besides on a "tablet", why does it make sense to isolate it as a sub-category outside of the classification, when other devices of similar nature (netbooks/chromebooks) are included as "PC"s? It doesn't.

But I also understand your struggle with disrupting the PC paradigm. Many tech people self-define based on their tech - this disruption threatens that and forces mental gynastics to vault around, over and through defining the concept of personal computer.

If you are going to insist on being an ass, at least demonstrate the intelligence to be a smart one

Seeing how Apple also does not include iPad sales as computer sales this is a mute point.

It would be an insult to OSX and MACs to include them with a toy like the ipad in the first place

Apple doesn't get to determine classification, but they can break up sales any way they chose, so the point is moot.*

Further, the classification in your argument of the iPad as a toy has been categorically refuted at a level that it can only be used by you as deliberately inflammatory.

*a moot point - in classical english it refers to an argument open to contention (from the use of a moot or assembly to discuss points of law), in the US, it is used to declare the question as irrelevant

If you are going to insist on being an ass, at least demonstrate the intelligence to be a smart one

and you telling me that the total number of ipads sold to date is enough to supply 12% of all Enterprise workers? hard to believe.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tallest Skil

Why do you have an account here?

He actually brings up a good point. Not the "12% of enterprise workers that do what?" point- but the fact he says the number of iPads sold are enough to supply 12% of all enterprise workers. That does seem hard to believe- particularly the fact that the vast majority of iPads are for personal use (not that they can't be used for business- but 12% does seem crazy high).